Determining appropriate training and course duration

Philanthropy Education (PE) is an RTO which delivers CHC43015 – Certificate IV in Ageing Support.

PE has recently enrolled 30 students who were previously undertaking this qualification with a now closed RTO. These students were halfway through their course, having completed only 9 of the 18 units of competency required to be awarded the full qualification. All students in this cohort are in the process of completing the minimum work requirement of 120 hours. The students also submitted assessments to the closed RTO which had not yet been marked, meaning they have partially completed some of the remaining units in the qualification. 

PE has developed a training and assessment strategy (TAS) targeted to this student cohort, which takes into consideration their existing skills, knowledge and experience.
 

Considering the AQF volume of learning range

Leigh, PE’s lead trainer and assessor for the Certificate IV firstly considers the AQF volume of learning range specified for the qualification, which is 0.5-2 years or 600-2400 hours. Leigh notes that this range applies to students who do not hold any of the competencies identified in the relevant units of competency to achieve all the skills, knowledge and learning outcomes for a Certificate IV. As the number of units and/or modules being delivered to these students is a proportion of the full qualification, Leigh reasonably determines that the amount of training and volume of learning required for these students can be reduced.
 

Developing a rationale for amount of training and volume of learning

In PE’s strategy documents, Leigh provides a pedagogical rationale to justify the shorter duration of training and assessment which outlines that:

• the student cohort are able to be granted credit for the units already completed
• the students can apply for recognition of prior learning (RPL) for the units they had partially completed, where sufficient evidence can be provided
• gap training can be provided for the remaining and partially completed units
• the hours already completed as part of the minimum work requirement of 120 hours will be recognised.
   

Assessing background, existing skills and knowledge of students

To support this rationale, PE firstly uses assessment tools to ensure that all students have the required language, literacy, numeracy and digital (LLND) skills prior to commencing training. PE also schedules meetings with all 30 students to determine whether the amount of training needs to be adjusted to cater to the individual student. During these meetings, PE:

• determines whether any reasonable adjustments or additional learning supports need to be incorporated into the design of PE’s training and assessment strategies
• requests evidence from students, including statements of attainment issued by the closed RTO, resumes and any other academic transcripts from related qualifications
• determines whether students have any commitments outside of the course which may affect the mode(s) of delivery and frequency of training (full time or part time).

PE then organises virtual meetings with each student’s workplace supervisor to discuss students’ progress in the mandatory minimum work requirement of 120 hours. 

From these meetings, PE gathers evidence which can be used as part of the RPL process and can develop training plans which reflect individual students’ needs.

PE lastly takes a best practice approach and conducts a mapping analysis for those units which PE can grant credit for. Mapping is also conducted for those units which have been partially completed and for which assessments have not yet been marked. As part of this process, PE obtains copies of all unmarked assessments along with the coursework materials produced by the closed RTO and used by students for these units. The closed RTO's coursework is then compared with PE’s own training and assessment resources to assess whether students have acquired the relevant skills and knowledge to be deemed competent in these units.
 

Determining best training and assessment delivery methods

As a result of these procedures, PE determines that training and assessment will be delivered via:

• theory classes through a combination of face-to-face classes, trainer-directed theory workshops and structured online learning
• on-the-job work placement
• post placement reviews.

The outcomes of the individual meetings with students determine what proportion of theory classes can be taken online versus face-to-face.

The TAS (including the rationale for the shorter duration training), individual training plans and evidence used to conduct the mapping analysis are all retained in the RTO’s human resources files. 

Australian Business Leaders Pty Ltd (ABL) is an enterprise RTO which provides training and assessment for BSB50120 – Diploma of Business. They have developed a training and assessment strategy (TAS) for two student cohorts undertaking the Business Operations specialisation of the diploma. The first cohort consists of employees who are new to the workforce and are interested in creating further educational and employment opportunities for themselves. The second cohort comprises of employees who have been in the workforce for several years and are looking to upskill and seek a formal qualification. 
 

Considering the AQF volume of learning range

When designing their TAS, ABL’s trainers and assessors firstly considered the volume of learning range for a diploma, which is 1-2 years or 1200-2400 hours. They then identified a suitable amount of training for their employees based on the different student cohorts, the training products being delivered and the mode of delivery of the training products.
 

Assessing the complexity of the units and student cohorts

Through an evidence-based analysis of each of the units in the qualification, ABL’s trainers and assessors reasonably determined that not all units require the same amount of training, as there is variance in their complexity. The depth and breadth of knowledge, skills and application of skills required for the elective unit BSBTWK503 – Manage meetings is less complex than that of the core unit BSBFIN501 – Manage budgets and financial plans. Therefore, the amount of training for the elective unit is comparatively lower.

The amount of training delivered for certain units also varied between student cohorts. All employees were enrolled in the core unit BSBXCM501 – Lead communication in the workplace. Employees with several years of workplace experience have developed skills and knowledge which satisfies some of the unit requirements. Therefore, this cohort were provided shorter delivery timeframes for the unit compared to their peers who are new to the workforce and learning the skills for the first time.
 

Considering influencing factors to develop a rationale for amount of training 

ABL’s trainers and assessors justified the shortened delivery timeframes in their TAS, outlining:

• information gathered from pre-enrolment interviews (with students and their workplace supervisors) and language, literacy, numeracy and digital skill assessments
• RPL assessments conducted including supporting evidence and documentation from students of their previous skills, knowledge and experience
• mapping activities undertaken to assess any potential gap training which needs to be delivered.

ABL also considered other influencing factors on the amount of training delivered including the mode of delivery. The assessment conditions for the qualification’s core and elective units require skills to be demonstrated in a workplace or simulated environment. Therefore, students were required to attend face-to-face classes to meet these conditions. ABL determined that students could also engage in self-paced online learning for some theoretical and knowledge-based components of the units, ensuring that all online learning undertaken were measurable, set exercises. 

While the mode of delivery is the same for all students, ABL recognised that the cohort who are new to the workforce may seek extra support and require increased opportunities for learning to build their capability. ABL documented any adjustments made to the amount of training delivered to these students, along with ABL’s provision of support services, in students’ individual training plans.